-- Posted by ATTI at 5:39 pm on Sep. 17, 2008 I've been struggling with the question of the existence of a soul for a long time. And I've come to a tentative personal conclusion that I don't believe a soul exists. In me, in you, in anyone. I think it's all chemical. Everything we experience, thoughts, feelings, love, hate, happiness, sadness. It's all just chemical reactions in our brains, all biologically determined. I was talking to a friend about this the other night, and he said that he couldn't believe that, since life without a soul would have no meaning. And I started thinking... if you feel that it's real, and you're experiencing it as if it's real, why would it have no meaning? A forgery of the Mona Lisa is wouldn't be any less beautiful. If you can't tell one from the other, why should the origin matter? Even if it's not produced the way you thought (ie - chemical vs. perpetuated by the "soul"), why would it be any less real? I feel love; happiness; anger; compassion... they're just as real to me without the belief in a soul. It doesn't make it any less real or relevant to how I live and what I choose to make of life, just because I don't think it's the work of a soul. What do you think? If you were confronted with irrefutable evidence that the soul does not exist, would it change your perception of the worth of life? -- Posted by Pisciculus at 5:40 pm on Sep. 17, 2008 It would for sure effect how i see things, but it would have the same amount of meaning.... -- Posted by HeartofJuyoMk2 at 5:41 pm on Sep. 17, 2008 Life without free will is not life. Free will is a function of our cosciousness, and I believe you are right, though you couldn't use a more subjective term than "soul". -- Posted by TheOtherHorseman at 5:41 pm on Sep. 17, 2008 I like to believe that we have souls. That being said, people who think life is meaningless without an afterlife confuse the fuck out of me. What are you doing with your life, people? -- Posted by FurryPanther at 5:42 pm on Sep. 17, 2008 I don't believe there is a soul. The primary purpose of a soul is to go on to the afterlife, to continue in some way. The whole idea is merely a reflection of our fear to simply end. You don't need a soul for life to have meaning. As for the 'what is that meaning? What is it all for? It's for this, now. The little pleasures, like dancing in the rain and growing flowers. Making art, and savoring food. Getting to know people, and in many cases, losing them. This is what it's all about, because this is all there is. It's not depressing, because it makes the here and now that much more enjoyable, because it's all we've got. FP -- Posted by ATTI at 5:44 pm on Sep. 17, 2008 Quote: from HeartofJuyoMk2 at 1:41 am on Sep. 18, 2008 Life without free will is not life. Free will is a function of our cosciousness, and I believe you are right, though you couldn't use a more subjective term than "soul". How can the concept of a soul not be subjective? Every great religion speaks of the soul, yet every person's definition of such varies, even if only a little. By soul, I was referring to the replier's personal concept of the soul, and what it would mean to them if it did not exist. -- Posted by tell me again at 5:49 pm on Sep. 17, 2008 What does it matter whether what you are is made of scientifically-explanable parts, or not? It doesn't bother me whatsoever whether I am made of matter/chemicals, or if there is an insubstantial part of me called the "soul". -- Posted by Bobman21 at 9:51 pm on Sep. 17, 2008 Who says life has to have inherent meaning?  As far as I'm concerned, life has only the meaning that we give it.  So no, it doesn't matter that 'life without a soul would have no meaning,' because with or without a soul, life still has no meaning.  Even if we have a soul, what difference does that make?  Our meaning in life is to fulfill "god's" plan?  I don't think so. -- Posted by nikki at 1:43 am on Sep. 18, 2008 I think we do have a soul, but not in the traditional way. We are our souls. How we live our lives, our emotions, our thoughts, our feelings - all of those things contribute to our souls, which die along with us, when we die. Life is what we make it. I believe that our souls exist as a part of us. They're not something we need to go into the "afterlife", or anything. It's a part of us that feels the emotions and dangers of life. -- Posted by allsmiles at 9:50 am on Sep. 18, 2008 Life is worth living without a soul. Certainly, for me anyway. I do not require nor expect a meaning of my life. I simply desire to live it. Everything save consiousness, sapience, and self is superfluous. I feel that the soul only exists if you require its existence. Ie, it's a mental construct, guardian angel, whatever you want to call it... something to prop you up against self annihilation. -- Posted by TRIPonME at 2:52 am on Sep. 24, 2008 With or without a soul, with or without free will life is worth living anyways. Everything has its own role to play and whether if that role is predestined or not, whether if it has an intrinsic meaning or not, is not relevant to the experience itself.  What I see as the beauty of life is all of the things that I think and feel, even if I am simply a machine, because that is as rich and as rewarding an experience I can ever get. -- Posted by the seer at 10:04 pm on Oct. 17, 2008 i think that without a soul (though this isn't my personal belief) life has even more importance because without an afterlife you actions in this life count for so much more. just my thoughts though. -- Posted by MotoMojo at 12:34 pm on Oct. 24, 2008 While I agree with the seer, I would have to say the existence of a "soul" is insignificant in my views of life. To me, this is the same as if you grew up your whole life thinking that purple was called "rentle", only to later find out it's not rentle at all -- it is purple. Though the symbolic way you think of the object or concept has changed, its perceived and physical properties would remain the same. -- Posted by sadnessness at 11:15 am on Nov. 18, 2008 I dont believe in souls, and i dont believe that my life has a purpose. Nothing of me will survive after my body gives out, and sometimes that depresses me, sometimes it inspires me. -- Posted by Periwinkle at 12:53 pm on Nov. 18, 2008 I don't believe we have souls, and I don't believe life has a meaning. Just because there isn't some great pre-ordained purpose to which everything has been leading doesn't mean you can't make a purpose for your own life, though. We may be in a meaningless world but we have the intellectual capacity to endow it with meaning ourselves. -- Posted by Takinam at 3:05 am on Nov. 19, 2008 Life is entirely worth living with or without dreams of spirit. If animals find it OK to live without a soul, I can do so as well. As I am an animal. -- Posted by medjai at 4:50 am on Nov. 19, 2008 Even if we have a soul it is ultimately reproducable by science. There is no such thing as supernatural as that is just a word for things we are not yet advanced enough to understand/verify/explain by science. The soul is a joke because it has no intelligence of it's own, your soul can't stop alzheimers so obviously a 'soul' has no capacity for memory, and it can't ignore brain damage so it obviously has no capacity for intelligence. It's pretty much worthless, if it does exist -- Posted by Chava at 8:07 am on Nov. 20, 2008 Is there any proof that man is actually endowed with a soul outside of religion? If we even have a soul then yes I believe it would be worth living. One chance on earth is still one chance on earth and what if there's nothing beyond this? I'd rather have existed than to never have seen, heard, tasted, or felt.